Kef R series or Tannoy Revolution Series?

IME, the Tannoys have a lot of LS50 strengths but with greater bass dynamics and extension. Soundstage depth is superior as well. Clarity seems about par. Another advantage of the the XT6Fs is they don’t need as high quality an amp to get them singing and can play quite loud with just a handful of watts. Their 90db sensitivity is believable - if it’s inflated, probably only by a db at the most.

I did experience some bass boom when they were initially placed in my concrete-backed-wall basement system. It turned out they were just on a mode peak. I adjusted their wall distance and rake angle and all was well.

As I stated earlier, I think their weaknesses are really only those of omission. The soundstage doesn’t extend much beyond the width of the speakers, bass depth is understandably limited to around 40Hz, and they don’t have the greatest treble "air" or note decay, but that’s really nitpicking for a $1500 pair of speakers.

My only real gripe comes down to cabinet finish. I don’t agree with reviewers that they can pass for $6K^ speakers. While certainly acceptable for the $2K price, the veneering could be a little better. The veneers are not book-matched (though not very obvious in the dark walnut), and the edges could be neater. The finish is not quite at the level of Monitor Audio, who really set the benchmark in this price range.

Side note / Rant:

Why are you considering the Q series? I always thought they were a terrible design.

    Correct me if I’m wrong… But when you’re using passive radiators, the radiator is recommended to be twice the surface area of the active driver, which would be fine if both the passive radiators KEF is using in the Q towers were in the same chamber as the woofer, but they are not. KEF uses one radiator for the mid-woofer (Part of the Uni-Q or what have you) in the top chamber and the other radiator for the woofer in a separate lower chamber, so the surface area of the radiators is equal to it’s corresponding active driver.

    That aside, the passive radiators are both facing in the same direction as the active drivers which causes them to be out of phase with the active drivers.  Then, ON TOP OF THAT, the two chambers are different sizes, so the radiators are reacting at different times because the air pressure is different in each cabinet. So now you have the two active drivers moving forward as a positive signal is applied to them, the two radiators now both move inward, BUT at two different speeds because of the different amounts of air pressure in the different sized cabinets. In slow motion this speaker must look like total chaos.

     Now… In THEORY, radiators act as ports, not as cones, so, in THEORY phasing should not be a problem. But I just don’t buy it. I don’t see how any of this is a good design. It looks like a mess that someone threw together. The Q series bookshelves all look great to me, but I have no leads on their thought process when it came to turning those bookshelf ideas into floorstanders. Somewhere, something went terribly wrong. Or maybe not, maybe it's fantastic and I just don't understand it.

I stand corrected.  In reading the review Audiotroy posted the Newer Q series (50's) have a proper 2:1 ratio for the radiators, which now both occupy the same chamber as the woofer.  Much better.  

eag618

"I am not sure anyone can keep natural boards flat enough to make solid wood cabinets "

Check out Daedalus speakers

Will do facten!